Brazil was left without a single regulated betting operator in activity on 7 November 2026, after the president of the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region (TRF3), Judge Johonsom di Salvo, extended to CDA Gaming the decision that had already overturned Stake’s injunction. The TRF3 president cited “normative instability” and a “multiplier effect”, and said the matter is in the hands of the Supreme Federal Court (STF).
The ruling closed off the last route to continued trading under a framework upended by Provisional Measure (Medida Provisória) 1.394/2026, which is in force and prohibits fixed-odds betting (apostas de quota fixa) throughout the national territory. Authorisations granted by the Secretariat of Prizes and Betting (SPA/MF) expired on 25 October 2026, under the 30-day period provided in Article 4 of the measure.
What the provisional measure does — and what it does not
Eighty-five authorisations had been issued to 82 companies, at R$30 million each, for a total of R$2.55 billion. The MP does not provide for any refund of those licence fees.
Operators turned to the courts, with limited success. As of 3 November 2026, none of the 19 cases filed in the Federal Court had an active injunction permitting operation. The TRF3 decision four days later removed the remaining exception.
The STF hearing: ADI 8.027
On 3 November 2026 the STF held a public hearing within ADI 8.027, running from 10:00 to 17:30 with 34 speakers and opened by Justice Luiz Fux.
Fux had expanded the list of speakers in an order dated 1 November 2026, at the request of the Attorney General’s Office (AGU), which argued that the previous composition was dominated by sports bodies (11) and operator representatives (6). Each of the 34 speakers was allotted 10 minutes.
The morning session, from 10:10 to 12:40, was allocated to sport: 11 clubs — Flamengo, Fluminense, Botafogo, Cruzeiro, São Paulo, Corinthians, Ponte Preta, Vitória, Guarani, Portuguesa and Grêmio — plus Fenapaf, the CBF, the COB and the Paralympic Committee. The CBF was to be represented by a lawyer rather than by its president, Samir Xaud.
Among the other participants was Abracopel, which represents state lottery concessionaires. The AGU argues that the prohibition is constitutional and that it falls to the Union to define which lottery modalities may be exploited. On the other side, the ANJL and the IBJR asked for MP 1.394/2026 to be suspended, contesting that it met the constitutional urgency requirement.
In his order, Fux stated that the health and consumer harms of betting are already known to the court, recalling the November 2024 hearing in ADIs 7.721 and 7.723. He also cited his 6 August 2026 vote in RE 966.177, in which he held that Article 50 of the Criminal Misdemeanours Law, punishing the exploitation of games of chance, was received by the Constitution; that judgment is suspended following a request to review the case file by Justice Flávio Dino.
The justice justified convening a new hearing on the basis that the MP is a subsequent fact raising questions of legal certainty, financial impact and existing contracts, and ordered the decision to be attached also to ADIs 7.721, 7.723, 7.749, 8.024, 8.028 and 8.035. The hearing is not a judgment: the 1 November order neither decided the injunction request nor indicated a deadline for doing so.
BNLData reported that it had not located an opinion from the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGR) on the MP as of 1 November 2026. The ANJL said it expected progress at the STF during the week of 3 November.
What an injunction would mean
Under Law 9.868/1999 (art. 10), an injunction in a direct action of unconstitutionality is granted by an absolute majority of the plenary — six justices — except during recess. Under the STF’s internal rules, the rapporteur may decide alone in urgent cases, and since Regimental Amendment 58 of December 2022 such a decision takes immediate effect but must go promptly to plenary referendum. Article 11, §1 provides that an injunction has ex nunc effect unless the court decides otherwise, while §2 establishes that suspension makes the previous legislation applicable — in this case Law 14.790/2023. In a merits judgment, modulation of effects requires a two-thirds vote, that is eight justices (art. 27).
A return to regulation would not necessarily be cost-free for operators. The IBJR has questioned whether companies would have to pay a new licence fee if the activity becomes regulated again — a doubt that also applies if Congress rejects the MP.
Municipal lotteries: ADPF 1.212
A parallel question reached the STF plenary on 4 November 2026, when judgment was scheduled to begin in ADPF 1.212, on whether municipalities may run their own lotteries, including fixed-odds betting. The action was filed by the Solidariedade party in March 2025. Rapporteur Justice Kassio Nunes Marques suspended all municipal laws on the subject in an injunction in December 2025 and admitted 14 amici curiae.
Both the AGU and the PGR argue that lottery exploitation is exclusive to the Union and the states.
Congress and the clock
On 9 November 2026 — the 45th day after publication — MP 1.394/2026 entered the urgency regime and in principle blocks the agenda of the house in which it is being processed, under Article 62, §6 of the Constitution. The joint committee that should analyse the measure has not been installed; its composition was defined on 30 September 2026, and the MP received 99 amendments, five of which were later withdrawn.
In practice the agenda will not be blocked on 9 November: under Chamber of Deputies rules, a provisional measure only blocks the agenda after being voted in the joint committee and read in plenary, and even then the block reaches only ordinary bills on matters that may be dealt with by MP — as the STF confirmed in 2017 in MS 27.931.
The MP’s initial 60-day period ends on 23 November 2026 and may be extended once for an equal period. Minister José Guimarães, of the Secretariat for Institutional Relations, cited 20 December as the deadline for constituting the joint committees, while the limit for Congress to deliberate is early March 2027, since the count is suspended during the 23 December to 1 February recess.
The government says it wants to vote on the measure by the end of the year, alongside the constitutional amendment proposals on Public Security and Tarifa Zero.
The argument outside the courtroom
The prohibition has also drawn public criticism. In an article published by O Globo on 6 November 2026, Gustavo Binenbojm argued that by opting for prohibition the State neither eliminates demand for betting nor makes illegal operators disappear.
This article was produced with AI assistance and reviewed under the GamblingZine editorial verification process.
Sources
- STF, Congresso e loterias municipais concentram decisões nos próximos sete dias — Independent reporting (published 2026-11-03)
- bnldata.com.br — Authoritative secondary source
- bnldata.com.br — Authoritative secondary source
- bnldata.com.br — Authoritative secondary source
Reporting verified against the sources above; retrieval timestamps are preserved in the editorial record.